Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Shuler v. Neely, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    Curtis Shuler appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of Shuler's complaint for the reasons stated in Shuler v. Neely, No. 3:10-cv-00254-GCM (W.D.N.C. June 15, 2010). The court dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-10-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-6874

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Curtis Shuler appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of Shuler's complaint for the reasons stated in Shuler v. Neely, No. 3:10-cv-00254-GCM (W.D.N.C. June 15, 2010). The court dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views2 pages

    Shuler v. Neely, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Curtis Shuler appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of Shuler's complaint for the reasons stated in Shuler v. Neely, No. 3:10-cv-00254-GCM (W.D.N.C. June 15, 2010). The court dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 10-6874

    CURTIS SHULER,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    RICHARD NEELY, Superintendent of Lanesboro Correctional
    Institution;
    J.
    BENNETT,
    Superintendent
    of
    Lanesboro
    Correctional Institution; J. ATWATER, Mailroom Supervisor,
    Lanesboro
    Correctional
    Institution;
    STEVIE
    MILLER,
    Correctional Officer, Lanesboro Correctional Institution,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
    Graham C. Mullen,
    Senior District Judge. (3:10-cv-00254-GCM)

    Submitted:

    October 14, 2010

    Decided:

    October 22, 2010

    Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Curtis Shuler, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Curtis

    Shuler

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C.


    1915A(b) (2006).
    reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no


    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

    by the district court.

    See Shuler v. Neely, No. 3:10-cv-00254-

    GCM (W.D.N.C. June 15, 2010).

    We dispense with oral argument

    because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented


    in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
    decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like